No reasonable perfect duties (strictly defining prohibited and required actions) exist that, if we individually acted on them, global poverty would end. Yet we do have imperfect obligations (to adopt certain aims, without prescribing specific actions) to assist others. I can satisfy an imperfect obligation by adopting a cause—e.g. the wellbeing of the poor—and contributing to it. Yet, such duties will not end poverty; they do not prescribe everything required to produce that end. Some theorists have therefore argued that imperfect obligations can be converted into clear perfect obligations that more efficiently alleviate poverty. I argue that that once we understand the most plausible ethical role for imperfect duties, this exposes a deep flaw in the idea that such duties can/should be converted into perfect duties for the sake of poverty alleviation. It undermines the value and purpose of having such moral duties in the first place.
